linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v11 02/16] xfs: only call xfs_setsize

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250505142234.GG1035866@frogsfrogsfrogs>
Date: Mon, 5 May 2025 07:22:34 -0700
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
To: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, brauner@...nel.org,
	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, jack@...e.cz, cem@...nel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, dchinner@...hat.com,
	linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	ojaswin@...ux.ibm.com, ritesh.list@...il.com,
	martin.petersen@...cle.com, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-block@...r.kernel.org, catherine.hoang@...cle.com,
	linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 02/16] xfs: only call xfs_setsize_buftarg once per
 buffer target

On Mon, May 05, 2025 at 11:55:13AM +0100, John Garry wrote:
> On 05/05/2025 11:49, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Mon, May 05, 2025 at 11:04:55AM +0100, John Garry wrote:
> > > @@ -503,6 +509,9 @@ xfs_open_devices(
> > >   		mp->m_logdev_targp = xfs_alloc_buftarg(mp, logdev_file);
> > >   		if (!mp->m_logdev_targp)
> > >   			goto out_free_rtdev_targ;
> > > +		error = sync_blockdev(mp->m_logdev_targp->bt_bdev);
> > > +		if (error)
> > > +			goto out_free_rtdev_targ;
> > >   	} else {
> > >   		mp->m_logdev_targp = mp->m_ddev_targp;
> > >   		/* Handle won't be used, drop it */
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Right?
> > Yes.  Or in fact just folding it into xfs_alloc_buftarg, which might
> > be even simpler.
> 
> Yes, that was my next question..
> 
> >  While you're at it adding a command why we are doing
> > the sync would also be really useful, and having it in just one place
> > helps with that.
> 
> ok, there was such comment in xfs_preflush_devices().
> 
> @Darrick, please comment on whether happy with changes discussed.

I put the sync_blockdev calls in a separate function so that the
EIO/ENOSPC/whatever errors that come from the block device sync don't
get morphed into ENOMEM by xfs_alloc_buftarg before being passed up.  I
suppose we could make that function return an ERR_PTR, but I was trying
to avoid making even more changes at the last minute, again.

--D

> Thanks,
> John
> 
>